变性梯度凝胶电泳法研究季节变化对散养芦花鸡肠道菌群的影响

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0237

中国农学通报 ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (8): 129-134.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0237

所属专题：生物技术；植物保护；畜牧兽医

• 畜牧·动物医学·蚕·蜂 • 上一篇下一篇

变性梯度凝胶电泳法研究季节变化对散养芦花鸡肠道菌群的影响

张腾帅¹^,²^,³(), 张艳英², 刘京国¹()

¹农业农村部华北都市农业重点实验室,北京 102206
²河北科技师范学院动物科技学院,河北秦皇岛 066600
³河北省动物疫病预防控制中心,石家庄 050035

收稿日期:2021-03-09 修回日期:2021-07-30 出版日期:2022-03-15 发布日期:2022-04-06
通讯作者: 刘京国
作者简介:张腾帅,男,1994年出生,河北石家庄人,硕士研究生,主要从事家禽疾病的研究。通信地址：102206 北京市昌平区回龙观镇北农路7号北京农学院,E-mail： 943831441@qq.com
基金资助:
北京市属高等学校高层次人才引进与培养计划(CIT&TCD20154044)

Effect of Seasonal Variation on Intestinal Microflora of Free-range Luhua Chicken Analyzed by DGGE

ZHANG Tengshuai¹^,²^,³(), ZHANG Yanying², LIU Jingguo¹()

¹Key Laboratory of Urban Agriculture (North China), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Beijing 102206
²College of Animal Science and Technology, Hebei Normal University of Science and Technology, Qinhuangdao, Hebei 066600
³Hebei Animal Disease Prevention and Control Center, Shijiazhuang 050035

Received:2021-03-09 Revised:2021-07-30 Online:2022-03-15 Published:2022-04-06
Contact: LIU Jingguo

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究季节变化对鸡肠道菌群的影响,本文采用PCR-DGGE的方法研究了冬、春、夏季散养芦花鸡盲肠和小肠内的微生物群落结构变化。结果显示,随着季节的改变,散养芦花鸡肠道菌群结构变化较大,盲肠和小肠中夏季菌群结构与冬季相比只有66.7%、62.5%的相似度。盲肠微生物菌群多样性要明显高于小肠,但季节对盲肠和小肠微生物菌群的影响不同。相较于春季肠道菌群,冬季、夏季环境会导致盲肠菌群多样性降低,而导致小肠菌群多样性提高。盲肠中的共性菌为巨单胞菌属、拟杆菌属、梭菌属,小肠中的共性菌主要为乳杆菌。盲肠共性菌的数量随季节变化不大,小肠内不同种类乳杆菌的数量随季节变化较大。这些实验结果为根据季节变化在鸡饲料中添加不同的益生菌提供理论指导。

关键词: 肠道菌群, 季节变化, 多样性, 芦花鸡

Abstract:

To explore the effect of seasonal variation on the intestinal microflora of adult chicken, the PCR-DGGE method was used in this study to determine the microbial community in caecum and small intestine, which were collected from free-range Luhua chicken in winter, spring and summer. The results showed that the intestinal microflora of adult chicken changed greatly with season. There were only 66.7% and 62.5% similarity between microbial community in caecum and small intestine in summer and those in winter, respectively. The diversity of microbial community in caecum was much higher than that in small intestine. However, seasonal variation had different effects on the microflora of caecum and small intestine. The microflora diversity of caecum was lower in summer and winter than that in spring, while that of small intestine in summer and winter were higher. The common strains in caecum included Megamonas, Bacteroides and Clostridium, whose amount did not change with season; while the common strain in small intestine was mainly Lactobacillus, and the amount of its different species changed with season. These results provide a theoretical basis for adding distinct probiotics to forage according the seasonal variation.

Key words: intestinal microflora, seasonal variation, diversity, Luhua chicken

中图分类号:

S831.5

张腾帅, 张艳英, 刘京国. 变性梯度凝胶电泳法研究季节变化对散养芦花鸡肠道菌群的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(8): 129-134.

ZHANG Tengshuai, ZHANG Yanying, LIU Jingguo. Effect of Seasonal Variation on Intestinal Microflora of Free-range Luhua Chicken Analyzed by DGGE[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(8): 129-134.

图/表 4

参考文献 32

[1]	KAU A L, AHERN P P, GRIFFIN N W, et al. Human nutrition, the gut microbiome and the immune system[J]. Nature: International weekly journal of science, 2011, 474(7351):
[2]	SHANG Y, KUMAR S, OAKLEY B, et al. Chicken Gut Microbiota: Importance and Detection Technology[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2018, 5.
[3]	DIAZ CARRASCO J M, CASANOVA N A, fernÁNdez MIYAKAWA M E. Microbiota, gut health and chicken productivity: what is the connection?[J]. Microorganisms, 2019, 7(10):374. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms7100374 URL
[4]	张亚楠. 蛋鸡肠道微生物菌群结构特征与产蛋水平关联性研究[D]. 郑州:河南农业大学, 2016.
[5]	KUMAR S, CHEN C, INDUGU N, et al. Effect of antibiotic withdrawal in feed on chicken gut microbial dynamics, immunity, growth performance and prevalence of foodborne pathogens[J]. PloS ONE, 2018, 13.
[6]	BALLOU A L, ALI R A, MENDOZA M A, et al. Development of the chick microbiome: how early exposure influences future microbial diversity[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2016, 3:2.
[7]	STANLEY D, GEIER M S, CHEN H, et al. Comparison of fecal and cecal microbiotas reveals qualitative similarities but quantitative differences[J]. BMC Microbiology, 2015, 15:51. doi: 10.1186/s12866-015-0388-6 URL
[8]	WILLSON N L, NATTRASS G S, HUGHES R J, et al. Correlations between intestinal innate immune genes and cecal microbiota highlight potential for probiotic development for immune modulation in poultry[J]. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2018, 102:9317-9329. doi: 10.1007/s00253-018-9281-1 URL
[9]	FARAG M R, ALAGAWANY M. Physiological alterations of poultry to the high environmental temperature[J]. Journal of Thermal Biology, 2018, 76:101-106. doi: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2018.07.012 URL
[10]	LARA L J, ROSTAGNO M H. Impact of heat stress on poultry production[J]. Animals, 2013, 3:356-369. doi: 10.3390/ani3020356 URL
[11]	BURKHOLDER K M, THOMPSON K L, EINSTEIN M E, et al. Influence of stressors on normal intestinal microbiota, intestinal morphology, and susceptibility to Salmonella enteritidis colonization in broilers[J], Poultry Science, 2008, 87(9):1734-1741. doi: 10.3382/ps.2008-00107 URL
[12]	彭骞骞, 王雪敏, 张敏红, 等. 持续偏热环境对肉鸡盲肠菌群多样性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(1):186-194.
[13]	OAKLEY B B, VASCONCELOS E J R, DINIZ P P V P, et al. The cecal microbiome of commercial broiler chickens varies significantly by season[J]. Poultry Science, 2018, 10;3635-3644.
[14]	TONG Q, LIU X N, HU Z F, et al. Effects of captivity and season on the gut microbiota of the brown frog (Rana dybowskii)[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2019, 10:1912. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01912 URL
[15]	郭森, 孙全友, 魏凤仙, 等. 抗菌肽和地衣芽孢杆菌对肉仔鸡肠道微生物及免疫器官指数的影响[J]. 中国家禽, 2016, 38(18):26-31.
[16]	行浩. 饲粮中添加益生菌对蛋鸡早期生长、养分利用及肠道菌群的影响[D]. 扬州:扬州大学, 2016.
[17]	WEI S, MORRISON M, YU A. Bacterial census of poultry intestinal microbiome[J]. Poultry Science, 2013, 92:671-683. doi: 10.3382/ps.2012-02822 URL
[18]	MUYZER G, DE WAAL E C, UITTERLINDEN A G. Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction-amplified genes coding for 16S rRNA[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1993, 59(3):695-700. doi: 10.1128/aem.59.3.695-700.1993 URL
[19]	STALEY J T, KONOPKA A. Measurement of in situ activities of nonphotosynthetic microorganisms in aquatic and terrestrial habitats[J]. Annual Review of Microbiology, 1985, 39:321-346. doi: 10.1146/micro.1985.39.issue-1 URL
[20]	RAPPE M S, GIOVANNONI S J. The uncultured microbial majority[J]. Annual Review of Microbiology, 2003, 57:369-394. doi: 10.1146/micro.2003.57.issue-1 URL
[21]	JOHNSTON-MONJE D, MEJIA J L. Botanical microbiomes on the cheap: inexpensive molecular fingerprinting methods to study plant-associated communities of bacteria and fungi[J]. Applications in Plant Sciences, 2020, 8(4):e11334.
[22]	MORGAN H H, TOIT M D, SETATI M E. The grapevine and wine microbiome: insights from high-throughput amplicon sequencing[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2017, 8:820. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.00820 URL
[23]	夏围围, 贾仲君. 高通量测序和DGGE分析土壤微生物群落的技术评价[J]. 微生物学报, 2014, 54(12):1489-1499.
[24]	ZHOU Y, YAO Q, ZHU H H. Soil organic carbon attenuates the influence of plants on root-associated bacterial community[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2020, 11:594890. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.594890 URL
[25]	MARGIOTTA E, MIRAGOLI F, CALLEGARI M L, et al. Gut microbiota composition and frailty in elderly patients with Chronic Kidney Disease[J]. PLoS One, 2020, 15(4):e0228530. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228530 URL
[26]	王雪洁, 冯京海. 热应激对家禽肠道黏膜结构的影响及可能原因[J]. 动物营养学, 2018, 30(4):1224-1229.
[27]	SIEGERSTETTER S C, SCHMITZ-ESSER S, MAGOWAN E, et al. Intestinal microbiota profiles associated with low and high residual feed intake chickens across two geographical locations[J]. PLoS ONE, 2017, 12,e0187766. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187766 URL
[28]	ZHOU X, JIANG X, YANG C, et al. Cecal microbiota of Tibetan Chickens from five geographic regions were determined by 16S rRNA sequencing[J]. MicrobiologyOpen, 2016, 5:753-762. doi: 10.1002/mbo3.2016.5.issue-5 URL
[29]	KNAPP O, BENZ R, POPOFF M R. Pore-forming activity of clostridial binary toxins[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2016, 1858(3):512-525.
[30]	FORTE C, MANUALI E, ABBATE Y, et al. Dietary Lactobacillus acidophilus positively influences growth performance, gut morphology, and gut microbiology in rurally reared chickens[J]. Poultry Science, 2018, 97(3):930-936. doi: 10.3382/ps/pex396 URL
[31]	ALAQIL A A, ABBAS A O, El-BELTAGI H S, et al. Dietary supplementation of probiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus modulates cholesterol levels, immune Response, and productive performance of laying hens[J]. Animals (Basel), 2020, 10(9):1588.
[32]	WANG S, MARTINS R, SULLIVAN M C, et al. Diet-induced remission in chronic enteropathy is associated with altered microbial community structure and synjournal of secondary bile acids[J]. Microbiome, 2019, 7:126. doi: 10.1186/s40168-019-0740-4 URL

引物	序列
GC357F	5′-CGCCCGCCGCGCGCGGCGGGCGGGGCGGGGGCACGGGGGGCCTACGGGAGGCAGCAG-3′
357F	5′-CCTACGGGAGGCAGCAG-3′
518R	5′-ATTACCGCGGCTGCTGG-3′

引物	序列
GC357F	5′-CGCCCGCCGCGCGCGGCGGGCGGGGCGGGGGCACGGGGGGCCTACGGGAGGCAGCAG-3′
357F	5′-CCTACGGGAGGCAGCAG-3′
518R	5′-ATTACCGCGGCTGCTGG-3′

	冬盲	春盲	夏盲	冬小	春小	夏小
相似系数	100%	82.3%	66.7%	100%	77.8%	62.5%
香浓指数(H)	3.02	3.49	3.19	2.82	2.07	2.49
均匀度(E)	0.95	0.94	0.96	0.89	0.80	0.89

	冬盲	春盲	夏盲	冬小	春小	夏小
相似系数	100%	82.3%	66.7%	100%	77.8%	62.5%
香浓指数(H)	3.02	3.49	3.19	2.82	2.07	2.49
均匀度(E)	0.95	0.94	0.96	0.89	0.80	0.89

条带编号	序列长度	数据库中最相近的菌种名称	登陆号	相似性%
1	189	Bacteroides barnesiae	NR_041446.1	100
2	172	Clostridium viride	NR_026204.1	95
3	196	Megamonas funiformis	NR_041590.1	97
4	194	Lactobacillus johnsonii	NR_117574.1	100
5	195	Lactobacillus amylovorus	NR_117064.1	99
6	189	Bacteroides salanitronis	NR_074616.1	95
7	169	Kineothrix alysoides	NR_156081.1	100
8	194	Clostridium spiroforme	NR_119030.1	100
9	170	Eubacterium coprostanoligenes	NR_104907.1	94
10	171	Colidextribacter massiliensis	NR_147375.1	96
11	169	Paraclostridium benzoelyticum	NR_148815.1	99
a	195	Lactobacillus aviaries	NR_112692.1	99
b	170	Clostridium hiranonis	NR_028611.1	98
c	211	Lactobacillus acidophilus	NR_113638.1	96
d	194	Lactobacillus gallinarum	NR_042111.1	100
e	195	Lactobacillus satsumensis	NR_028658.1	95
f	169	Uncultured bacterium	FJ471300.1	100
g	169	Paraclostridium benzoelyticum^*	NR_148815.1	98
h	169	Paraclostridium benzoelyticum^**	NR_148815.1	98

变性梯度凝胶电泳法研究季节变化对散养芦花鸡肠道菌群的影响

Effect of Seasonal Variation on Intestinal Microflora of Free-range Luhua Chicken Analyzed by DGGE

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 32

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们

[1]	孙树晴, 丁炜, 孙瑞, 张希财, 兰国玉, 陈伟, 杨川, 吴志祥. 不同林龄橡胶林土壤细菌群落组成及多样性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(9): 93-100.
[2]	张杰, 祝志华, 张慧, 胡猛, 邱晨, 蔡宪文. 山东南四湖省级自然保护区野生鸟类调查及疫源疫病防控初探[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(9): 75-80.
[3]	孙歌, 接伟光, 胡崴, 张颖智, 乔巍, 魏丽娜, 姜怡彤, 白莉. 菌根真菌及菌根辅助细菌对农作物发育的影响研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(9): 88-92.
[4]	刘小英, 吴碧君, 张游南, 黄飞龙, 刘国强. 基于ISSR标记的龙眼种质资源遗传多样性及亲缘关系分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(31): 60-65.
[5]	赵雅儒, 邳植, 刘蕊, 马语嫣, 吴则东. 不同甜菜单胚细胞质雄性不育系与保持系的遗传多样性分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(30): 35-40.
[6]	孙志广, 潘根, 陈庭木, 李景芳, 赵利君, 迟铭, 徐波, 邢运高, 刘金波, 刘晓敏, 葛高宁, 徐锦涛, 王宝祥, 徐大勇. 基于SNP标记的穞稻与栽培稻的遗传多样性分析及萌发耐淹性评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(30): 6-13.
[7]	石丽红, 孙梅, 唐海明, 文丽, 李超, 程凯凯, 李微艳, 肖小平. 不同施肥模式下稻田土壤氮组分及微生物多样性研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(27): 106-110.
[8]	尤梦瑶, 万璐, 闫佳佳, 张赫, 郑春英. 甘草内生菌研究概况[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(26): 20-26.
[9]	洪慈清, 孙语遥, 莫雯婧, 方云, 陈芳容, 桂芳泽, 关雄, 潘晓鸿. 茶叶浸取液制备的纳米银对土壤微生物的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(23): 56-63.
[10]	苏凤秀. 广西北部湾滨海地区公园植物多样性调查研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(22): 79-83.
[11]	来锡福, 焦旭东, 王多文, 任学花, 屠丽芳. 武威地区苗圃地灯下蛾类昆虫多样性及时序动态分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(22): 104-109.
[12]	周程阳, 刘灏, 黄顶, 王洁, 励汀郁, 王明利, 张英俊, 李成玉, 翟熙玥, 杨午滕. 气候智慧型草地管理技术助力牧区振兴[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(20): 156-164.
[13]	张河庆, 吴婕, 韩帅, 席亚东, 李跃建, 梁根云. 4种周年轮作模式对耕作层土壤微生物的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(20): 73-80.
[14]	杜倩, 李琳, 刘铁男, 梁素钰. 复合菌肥对盐渍土土壤微生物多样性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(2): 38-43.
[15]	张佳琦, 郭宗珊, 刘长华, 李荣田. 黑龙江省水稻品种的遗传多样性[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(17): 1-9.